On Thu, 29 Aug 2002, Dennis Higbee wrote: [Mark M] #> All Dragaerans in the Empire are nobility, except Teckla and the rare #> outcast, such as Leareth. One way to look for evidence, though it #> wouldn't be proof either way: How many Dragons do we hear of by name? #> How many of them are identified by line? # #That was sort of my point. If all Dragons are nobility (and we know they #are), why would there be one set of Dragaons with last names and another #set without? All Dragons are nobility w.r.t. Tecklas. Obviously, some Dragons look down on other Dragons: nobility among Dragons, so to speak. (Are Morrolan's guards, like Fentor and Ulanor ["A Dream of Passion"], Dragons?) Having a famous ancestor is a good excuse. *If* you have a famous ancestor, you can claim him or her in your surname. But what if you don't have an ancestor who is great enough to inspire respect from other Dragons? You're S.O.L. You don't want to be known as Lord/Lady Floop e'Shnorgle, descendant of Shnorgle the So-so, who defeated four hundred rioting Teckla; so you're just (relatively) plain Lord/Lady Floop. This, I submit, is a plausible explanation for why there might be Dragons who don't use a surname of lineage. #_Dragon_ has the most Dragons in it, obviously, and there is a wide enough #cross-section of Dragons with surnames to make me think that having one #isn't a deliniation of "high" nobility. We know that Napper is e'Drien #and Virt is e'Terics, and Napper, at least, doesn't strike me as a nob on #the level of Morrolan e'Drien or Fornia e'Lanya. I don't remember if #Aelburr's line is given and I'm fairly sure that Ori's wasn't, but that #could just as easily be because Vlad didn't know or feel like sharing #their lineage. OK, that's data. The weight is fairly evenly balanced, and I'd say the jury is still out. -- Mark A. Mandel http://world.std.com/~mam/Cracks-and-Shards/ a Steven Brust Dragaera fan website